tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post6919207615541177926..comments2018-02-16T08:13:43.845+00:00Comments on Happiness of Being: The Teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi: Why is it necessary to make effort to practise self-investigation (ātma-vicāra)?Michael Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comBlogger161125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-44751128605932874422016-08-20T21:19:20.782+01:002016-08-20T21:19:20.782+01:00I doubt Steve D will see this, so this is mainly f...I doubt Steve D will see this, so this is mainly for future readers of this thread.<br /><br />Steve D wrote a long defense of Papaji, ending with &quot;I can only suspect that a lot of the animus for Papaji comes from misplaced and misdirected anger towards all the clowns who claim to be his devotees and subsequently claim to be enlightened, give satsang and generally behave like fools. But this does not and should not in any way reflect on Papaji as a teacher or as a saint of the highest caliber. &quot;<br /><br />Steve&#39;s source for his impression is David Godman&#39;s biography of Papaji. I want to point out that:<br /><br />* Godman has confirmed that all of the interactions between Papaji and Ramana Maharshi described in the biography are from interviews with Papaji, and that no confirmation of those interactions exist from other people. (The book is mostly an autobiography, since it is based largely on interviews with Papaji, although also includes interviews with family members, but those don&#39;t involve Papaji&#39;s internal state, nor can they.)<br /><br />* Whether or not anyone is a &quot;teacher or saint of the highest caliber&quot; is entirely subjective and without any objective way of verification.<br /><br />* Teachers have claimed enlightenment, taught others who exclaimed about their wonderfulness, and then subsequently admitted they are not enlightened and made many mistakes. So, impressions of students is never proof.<br /><br />* Papaji admitted to Godman in the book that he LIED to his disciples about the disciples being enlightened, in order to get them to go away because they were bugging him. Leaving aside the ethical problem of lying, this seems to be entirely contrary to the teacher&#39;s responsibility for his students. Real teachers do not pick and choose which students&#39; welfare they are responsible for.<br /><br />* The result of those lies weas that those students started teaching other people, even though they were not qualified to teach. This started the Neo-Advaita movement and a new wave of fake teachers. All that was the direct result of Papaji&#39;s lies, not an accidental result.<br /><br />* We know that it is very easy for a fake to put up a picture of Ramana, repeat the very simple Advaita philosophy and then collect the donations. Why do we not think that Papaji is just the same? The very long biography - all dictated by himself. Note that other disciples of Ramana have simply said &quot;My life is unimportant, just do self-enquiry&quot;.<br /><br />* Note that the real chronology is:<br /><br />- Papaji starts teaching in Lucknow<br />- Rajneesh disciples discover Papaji (since Rajneesh was the biggest fake ever, those disciples are the worst possible judge of a real teacher)<br />- Someone suggests to Godman that he should check out Papaji<br />- Papaji asks Godman to write his biography<br /><br />Note that biography gives the impression that Papaji teaching is the last thing in the chronology, which reinforces the impression of &quot;all these spiritual and religious events, followed by enlightenment, followed by teaching&quot;, but again that is only according to Papaji&#39;s account.<br /><br />At this point, since Papaji is dead, there is ZERO reason to read anything he wrote or said instead of Ramana Maharshi.<br /><br />Generally, there are two viewpoints:<br />* Those who are students of disciples of Papaji, who need him to have been an enlightened sage.<br />* Those who hate the Neo-Advaita movement, who want to use his statement to Godman that &quot;none of my students understood&quot; to discredit the movement. These people seem to need to preserve Papaji&#39;s credibility in order to discredit his students using that statement.<br /><br />However, due to his self-admitted lying to his disciples, I would say that he is the last person I would consider to have been an authentic teacher.Kenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08444422146838072196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-6296478764102767602016-04-25T09:15:33.787+01:002016-04-25T09:15:33.787+01:00Quotes of Sri Ramanasramam :
&quot;Not to desire ...Quotes of Sri Ramanasramam :<br /><br />&quot;Not to desire anything extraneous to oneself constitutes vairagya(dispassion) or nirasa (desirelessness).<br />Not to give up one&#39;s hold on the Self constitutes jnana(knowledge).<br />But really vairagya and jnana are one and the same.&quot;<br /><br />But I did neither even keep distance from desires nor got I the hold on the Self.<br />So what shall I do ?cross-checknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-24445662502478549352016-04-23T11:06:19.737+01:002016-04-23T11:06:19.737+01:00thank you sivanarul sir
yes yes my mother tongue ...thank you sivanarul sir<br /><br />yes yes my mother tongue is tamil and hence i can and will use நான் for clarity of purpose<br /><br />will update you<br /><br />om namo bhagavathe sri Ramanayadr.sundaramhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16381590443637050853noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-20685784511389637392016-04-23T03:11:47.896+01:002016-04-23T03:11:47.896+01:00namaskaram sivanarul sir
do u mind passing a pdf ...namaskaram sivanarul sir<br /> do u mind passing a pdf or a copy k on swami ramanagiri, please<br /><br />om namo bhagavathe sri ramanayadr.sundaramhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16381590443637050853noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-12188830756496867692016-04-22T22:56:48.596+01:002016-04-22T22:56:48.596+01:00Whenever I read about Swami Ramanagiri, I get remi...Whenever I read about Swami Ramanagiri, I get reminded of how one can personalize Sadhana and how Yoga, Vichara, Bhakthi and Imagination all nicely melded together that resulted in the final awakening. It is such an inspiration and treat to read it. Thanks for David Godman for writing it and Michael for finding it (David says: About twenty years ago I was given a seventeen-page manuscript about Swami Ramanagiri by Michael James, who had received it from a devotee of Swami Ramanagiri.)Sivanarulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-1388561874395792862016-04-22T22:40:14.548+01:002016-04-22T22:40:14.548+01:00Continued from previous comment:
Then he, in that...Continued from previous comment:<br /><br />Then he, in that same slow manner, answers, ‘To me, to me, to me’.<br /><br />‘Then who am I? Then who am I? Then who am I?’<br /><br />All questions and answers are repeated three times, very slowly.<br /><br />‘This “I” is not a thought. This “I” is not a thought. This “I” is not a thought.’<br /><br />‘Then who is the receiver of the thought? Then who is the receiver of the thought? Then who is the receiver of the thought?’<br /><br />‘”I” – “I” – “I”’ Now the mind is centralised in the source itself. ‘<br /><br />‘Then who am I? Then who am I? Then who am I?’<br /><br />Now the breath comes to an end and the attention is concentrated 100% on the sound caused by the palpitation of the heart, as if the sound would give the answer to our questions. This is nothing but the pranava itself. If, during this time, the sakti which was static is converted to movements or becomes dynamic, trance will occur. If the primal energy reaches the space between the eyebrows, savikalpa samadhi will occur. If the energy rises up to the top of the head, nirvikalpa samadhi will occur, which is nothing but the Self itself.<br /><br />However, you should also know that even if the doctor has closed the dispensary door, some patients may come and peep in through the window to complain about their ailments. At the beginning of atma-vichara, the patients at the window are many. In the same way, although the door to the cave of the Heart is closed, some thoughts may occur at the time of dhyana.<br /><br />For example, a thought may come: ‘Mr Iyer’s sushumna nadi has opened up.’<br /><br />Since the patient has not come at the proper time, the doctor doesn’t attend to him.<br /><br />Instead, he continues the quest: ‘To whom has the thought of Mr Iyer come?’ ‘To me, to me, to me.’<br /><br />‘Then who am I? Then who am I? Then who am I?’<br /><br /><br />Sivanarulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-84461031841228832562016-04-22T22:38:55.221+01:002016-04-22T22:38:55.221+01:00Techinque used by Swami Ramanagiri:
http://sri-ra...Techinque used by Swami Ramanagiri:<br /><br />http://sri-ramana-maharshi.blogspot.com/2009/01/swami-ramanagiri.html<br /><br />Our own mind is the greatest cheater in the world. It will make thousands of different reasons to go its own way. There are three ways of handling this cheat, who is nothing but a bundle of thoughts creeping into the conscious mind.<br />The third way is the way taught by Sri Ramana in the days of silence at the foot of sacred Arunachala. This way, which has been adopted by this fool, is to treat the mind as a patient, or rather several patients who are coming to a doctor to complain about their various ailments.<br /><br />Just as a doctor sits in his room receiving different kinds of patients, this fool imagines himself sitting in the sacred cave of the Heart and receiving the different thought-patients. You know that a sick person likes to babble for hours about his complaint. In the same way a thought likes to multiply itself, but the doctor always cuts it short, saying, ‘Very good. Take this medicine. Thank you very much.’ And then he calls for another patient. This is how this fool decided to meditate.<br /><br />First the fool slows down his breath as much as possible, but only to the point where there is no discomfort. To this fool, two breaths per minute is the proper speed, but that may not be possible for you because this fool has practised for a long time. You may be able to decrease your breathing to 8-10 per minute in the beginning. Don’t get to a level where you are uncomfortable, because that discomfort will give rise to thoughts.<br /><br />This fool decided to receive twenty patients before closing the dispensary of the Heart. He calls out ‘Number one!’ and he waits for thought patient number one to come. The thought patient may say, ‘Smt such-and-such is not well. Sri so-and-so is worried.’<br /><br />Then this foolish doctor says, ‘Oh, you are number one. Very good. The name of Lord Murugan will cure you. Thank you very much.’<br /><br />Then he calls for number two, and he waits till the second patient is entering the room. ‘Mr so-and-so may get mukti this life,’ he says.<br /><br />‘Very good. You are number two. The whole world is benefited if one soul gets liberated. Thank you very much.’<br /><br />Numbers three, four, five, and so on are dealt with in the same way. When all the twenty thought patients have come and gone, the doctor closes the room to the Heart, and no one else is allowed to come inside. Now he is alone. Now there is time for atma-vichara.<br /><br />He asks himself, ‘To whom have all these thoughts come?’<br /><br />Three times he slowly repeats the same question, along with the outgoing breaths.<br />Sivanarulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-17507292399831599352016-04-22T22:33:19.843+01:002016-04-22T22:33:19.843+01:00Dr Sundaram,
“but you have not said still how to ...Dr Sundaram,<br /><br />“but you have not said still how to be self attentive? what exactly one has to do when you say self attentive? i mean the detail of self attentiveness pleasebhagavan says to do athma vichara? self attentiveness is even while in life&#39;s activities, ...........right? when I devote some hours exclusively for athma vicharam, the self attentiveness is ever all day along required..right?<br />please explain if you can along with how?”<br /><br />Vichara is not my main Sadhana. So please take whatever I write with a grain of salt. One of the techniques I do is as follows (Based on your name I assume you know Tamil):<br /><br />Mentally bring up the thought or mentally say <b>நான்</b> (I). If Tamil is your mother tongue then நான் is preferred than I, since the inward turning will be better, if the thought voice is in mother tongue (just my opinion). As soon as நான் is said (mentally, not verbally), a focus on Thanmai Unarvu (I feeling, for lack of better word) will happen. Hold on to that Thanmai Unarvu to the extent possible. A thought, feeling or perception will arise pretty quickly. You know that it arose in you (to நான்). Turn to நான் again. If the turning does not happen, then again mentally say நான். Rinse and Repeat. <br /><br />Before you start Vichara, it may be helpful to focus on the breath with diaphragmatic breathing (When you breathe in, belly should go out. When you breathe out, belly should go in). Doing this for a several minutes, will make the mind very calm and will prepare it for Vichara.<br /><br />With respect to doing Vichara during life activities, it is indeed very difficult to do while working on something critical. But like I said in my last reply, there will be small intervals available during the day. I have been able to do Sadhana (Focus on the breath with diaphragmatic breathing) only during those intervals. As Michael writes, in many of us, the desire to end Samsara once and for all is not strong enough. Until that desire gets very strong, doing Vichara during life activities is very difficult and we would have to settle for doing during those small intervals.<br /><br />In my next comment I will post the technique Swami Ramanagiri used that you may find helpful.Sivanarulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-42323066428909948632016-04-22T20:37:44.701+01:002016-04-22T20:37:44.701+01:00Michael and Dr.Sundaram
Michael, thank you for poi...Michael and Dr.Sundaram<br />Michael, thank you for pointing out my wrong view about self-attentiveness<br />and for characterizing the correct way to deprive our ego oft he food it depends for survival.<br />Please, Michael do always delete if inapplicable !<br />Dr.Sundaram, I must apologize to you for my improper comment.<br />Thank goodness , Michael, you did revise my misleading incorrect, erroneus and highly inapproriate recommendation to Dr. Sundaram in time before he could act on /follow my inadequate advice. If I may say something in my defence: to my regret while writing my comment I obviously was still haunted by my experience in my struggle with myself when in my practice I have to fight frequently bitter battles against overpowering thoughts in order to turn my attention back to myself. Annihilating thoughts in the very place from which they arise and hereby clinging firmly to be attentively aware of myself alone is by no means a simple matter for me to do it.<br />waving cornfieldnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-28059638740127992722016-04-22T14:20:12.809+01:002016-04-22T14:20:12.809+01:00Waving Cornfield, in your latest comment there see...Waving Cornfield, in <a href="#c2891779059718957367" rel="nofollow">your latest comment</a> there seems to be some confusion about what self-attentiveness actually is, because you refer to ‘inspection of your thoughts’ and say ‘Watch your emotional life’. Our thoughts, emotions and all other phenomena are things other than ourself, so inspecting them, watching them or attending to them is not being self-attentive. The only thought we should inspect or watch is our primal thought called ‘I’, which is our ego, the subject that is aware of all objects or phenomena.<br /><br />As Bhagavan advises us, whenever we become aware of any thought (that is, anything other than ourself) we should turn our attention back to ourself (our fundamental self-awareness) by investigating to whom it appears, and in this way ‘நினைவுகள் தோன்றத் தோன்ற அப்போதைக்கப்போதே அவைகளையெல்லாம் உற்பத்திஸ்தானத்திலேயே விசாரணையால் நசிப்பிக்க வேண்டும்’ (<i>niṉaivugaḷ tōṉḏṟa-t tōṉḏṟa appōdaikkappōdē avaigaḷai-y-ellām uṯpatti-sthāṉattilēyē vicāraṇaiyāl naśippikka vēṇḍum</i>), which means ‘As and when thoughts appear, then and there it is necessary to annihilate them all by <i>vicāraṇā</i> [self-investigation] in the very place from which they arise’ (<a href="http://www.happinessofbeing.com/nan_yar.html#para11" rel="nofollow">eleventh paragraph</a> of <i>Nāṉ Yār?</i>).<br /><br />As he explains in <a href="http://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-ego-is-essentially-formless-and.html#un25" rel="nofollow">verse 25</a> of <i>Uḷḷadu Nāṟpadu</i>, the nature of our ego is to rise, stand and nourish itself by ‘grasping form’, which means by attending to or being aware of any phenomena — anything other than our fundamental self-awareness — so it will subside and cease to exist only by trying to attend to itself alone. Therefore we should try to cling firmly to being attentively aware of ourself alone, because this is the only way to deprive our ego of the food it depends for survival and thereby to dissolve the illusion that it is ourself.Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-52386388022965377722016-04-22T12:32:09.106+01:002016-04-22T12:32:09.106+01:00Sundaram, regarding your question ‘Self attend to ...Sundaram, regarding <a href="#c1988769978611214069" rel="nofollow">your question</a> ‘Self attend to what?’, self-attentiveness means just being attentively aware of oneself alone, or at least trying to be so. We are now aware of many things, and among these many things we attend to those that interest or concern us most, so since we are interested in many things other than ourself, we tend to spend most of our waking and dreaming hours attending only to other things instead of to ourself. However in order to investigate what we are and thereby to experience ourself as we actually are, we need to try to attend to ourself alone, so <i>ātma-vicāra</i> is simply the practice of trying to be self-attentive — that is, attentively aware of oneself alone.<br /><br />To the extent that we manage to be attentively aware of oneself alone, our attention will thereby be withdrawn from other things. However, unless our mind or power of attention is already very pure, clear, subtle, sharp and discerning, we will not at first be able to focus our entire attention only on oneself, so our self-awareness will still be mixed to some extent with awareness of other things, even if those other things are just very subtle thoughts or phenomena.<br /><br />However this does not matter, because if we persevere in trying as much as possible to be attentively aware of oneself alone, our mind will thereby be progressively purified and clarified, until eventually it will be subtle and sharp enough for us to discern and be aware of ourself alone, whereupon it will merge back into our actual self, which is just pure, infinite and immutable self-awareness, never to rise again.<br /><br />Until we thereby merge back forever into ourself, the source from which we seem to have risen as this ego or mind, we will continue to be aware of other things in waking and dream, and in each of these states we will be aware of ourself as if we were a particular body. As such we will seem to have duties, cares and responsibilities, which will require at least some of our attention. However, even in the midst of attending to such things, we will be able with persistent practice to hold on to self-attentiveness at least to a certain extent in the background, as it were, because whatever else we may be aware of, we are always aware of ourself, so at least a part of our attention can always be on ourself.<br /><br />The extent to which we are thus able to be self-attentive even in the midst of other activities depends upon our love to be so, and our love to be so will steadily increase as our mind is purified by persistent practice. At present, however, all we need be concerned with is trying to be self-attentive as much as possible. Like a small child learning to walk, we will fall over many times, but however many times we fall we should just persevere in trying. As Bhagavan often used to say, no one succeeds in this path without patient perseverance.Michael Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03460943269122289281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-28917790597189573672016-04-22T10:54:28.514+01:002016-04-22T10:54:28.514+01:00Dr. Sundaram,
as I already wrote attending vigilan...Dr. Sundaram,<br />as I already wrote attending vigilantly to yourself is looking/hearing etc. extremely watchful/heedful/meticulous/scrupulous/thorough/precise towards the &#39;I&#39;-thought. Who am I ? That means on close inspection, closer inspection and closest inspection of your thoughts, particularly when you are abandoning yourself to your thoughts or you are lost in thought. Watch your emotional life: Ascertain by sight ! <br />With the powers of observation keep yourself under keen, sharp, penetrating, incisive, diligent scrutiny.<br />You must try it by yourself. As nobody can tell you how to breathe, more cannot be said about the method of practising self-attentiveness.waving cornfieldnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-87041233245202870422016-04-22T08:00:58.677+01:002016-04-22T08:00:58.677+01:00I had written a series of comments (in three parts...I had written a series of comments (in three parts) dated 21 April 10:11, 10:45 and 14:04. In the first of these comments I wrote:<br /><br />As he [Michael] also writes, &#39;we must accept that we have at least some freedom to will and act (<i>icchā-kriyā-svatantra</i>)&#39;. It is this freedom to will and act that creates our <i>agamya-karmas</i>. <br /><br />I was reflecting on the different types of freedom which we have to will and act (<i>icchā-kriyā-svatantra</i>). I think we can divide our freedom to will and act into four different types of actions. Out of these four, three types of actions creates <i>agamya</i>, and one type does not create any <i>agmaya</i> but still is a freedom to will and act, or to be more accurate it is a freedom to will but not act. Let me try to expand on this. [...]<br /><br />I think I did not formulate or conveyed my thoughts very clearly here and at other places on this thread, and also I could have been factually incorrect. On thinking more deeply, I think we have only one type of freedom to will and act (<i>icchā-kriyā-svatantra</i>) and not four types as I had mentioned on this thread, and this power to will and act is inherent in our ego. It is just that our inherent freedom to will and act can be acted upon in different ways, like the four ways I had mentioned in my relevant thread. I hope I am more accurate now. <br /><br />I had written in the second comment on this thread:<br /><br />Third type of freedom we have is our original freedom to will and act, and this is inherent in our <i>chit-skati</i>. Our pure self-awareness has no <i>vasanas</i> or <i>prarabdha</i>, but our original round of actions has supposedly started without these <i>vasanas</i> or <i>prarabdha</i> prompting us to act. Therefore our all powerful <i>chit-shakti</i> has this seeming power to will and action, and it is these actions which lead us to more and more actions. However in this process our original freedom of our chit-shakti is not lost. The actions originating from this freedom also creates <i>agamya</i>.<br /><br />The question can arise as to how did this original freedom to will and act originate? It is like trying to find out as to how and when our ego came into existence? Answer to both questions are, as Michael had written, &#39;both cause and effect and logic come into existence only when this ego [or actions] arises, so its origination and cessation are the very borders beyond which no logic or ideas about cause and effect can apply&#39;.<br /><br />However, as Michael says, Bhagavan teaches us that the ego comes into existence by &#39;grasping form&#39; or being self-negligent, therefore only our self-attentiveness or <i>sada-apramada</i> (eternal non-negligence) - that is, grasping ourself alone instead of any other thing can dissolve the illusion of our seeming existence.<br />As our ego comes into seeming existence, its freedom to will and act (<i>icchā-kriyā-svatantra</i>) also comes into seeming existence simultaneously, because without acting in one form or another our ego cannot rise or come into existence.<br /><br />A question may arise: Do we practise self-attentiveness by making use of our freedom to will and act (<i>icchā-kriyā-svatantra</i>? I think we can say that our practice of self-attentiveness is just due to our freedom to will (<i>icchā-svatantra</i>, that is, since there is no action or <i>kriya</i> involved in our this practice, it is an actionless state of <i>just being</i>. Regards. <br /> <br />Sanjay Lohiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02384912997886218824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-57789266786377294762016-04-22T04:44:59.839+01:002016-04-22T04:44:59.839+01:00very well said mr Mouna thank you so much. will r...very well said mr Mouna thank you so much. will reflect on this and should i get any more while doing so ,in depth, hope i can post it for you<br />om namo bhagavathe sri ramanayadr.sundaramhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16381590443637050853noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-88035719060451901312016-04-22T04:40:34.717+01:002016-04-22T04:40:34.717+01:00many thanks Sivanarul sir
but you have not said ...many thanks Sivanarul sir<br /> but you have not said still how to be self attentive? what exactly one has to do when you say self attentive? i mean the detail of self attentiveness please<br />bhagavan says to do athma vichara? self attentiveness is even while in life&#39;s activities, ...........right? when I devote some hours exclusively for athma vicharam, the self attentiveness is ever all day along required..right?<br />please explain if you can along with how?<br />om namo bhagavathe sri ramanaya dr.sundaramhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16381590443637050853noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-79685775965674032742016-04-21T21:25:45.100+01:002016-04-21T21:25:45.100+01:00Dr. Sundaram, pranams
For what is worth, as a fell...Dr. Sundaram, pranams<br />For what is worth, as a fellow in the quest like you, this is my experience and understanding regarding one of the questions you asked.<br /><br />If someone were to ask you: &quot;Do you exist now?&quot; Or &quot;Is there existence now?&quot; your immediate response will have to be &quot;yes&quot;, don&#39;t you agree? For a split second your attention just turned from the external to the internal. You wouldn&#39;t have been able to respond &quot;no&quot; because the very fact of responding proves there is existence, &quot;something&quot; or &quot;someone&quot; (in this case <i>you</i>) exists in order to answer the question.<br />At the same time, the knowledge/awareness of existence (or that I exist) doesn&#39;t require any effort since there cannot be sense of existence without awareness/knowledge of it and vice-versa.<br /><br />So to start answering your question: &quot;Self attend to what?&quot; <br />This sense of existence/awareness is what is aimed at and the means is turning the attention inwards towards it.<br />This &quot;turning of the attention&quot; inwards could be done in several ways but the most effective at the beginning (at least for me) is Bhagavan&#39;s &quot;to whom this is happening?&quot;... to me.. &quot;Who am I?&quot; or &quot;Who or what is this <i>me</i>&quot;... and of course, there shouldn&#39;t be any answer because there will be no personalized &quot;entity&quot; found inside! <br />Asking these questions consistently at any moment (even while engrossed in activity) will make the mind turn inwards...<br /><br />The only &quot;effort&quot; seemingly involved will be turning attention, that usually is focused on objects other than oneself, towards that same sense of existence/awareness which is the ground, substratum and essential nature of everything we objectify, being material objects or psychological ones like thoughts/emotions/sensations.<br /><br />Summarizing, all that is required is to investigate the nature of the one &quot;I&quot; that says &quot;I am walking down the street&quot;, &quot;I am angry at you&quot;, &quot;I think he is talking nonsense&quot;, &quot;I love my children&quot;, etc... And when doing so we cannot not arrive to the awareness and existence that underlies our quest because not only that is who and what we are, but because we will not be able to find any personalized entity inside our body or skull that is &quot;I&quot;.<br /><br />Resting/abiding in That is all we need, and when the mind seemingly pops-in again then we start all over: &quot;to whom is this happening?&quot;... etc..<br />After a while we would not need ask the question anymore, the attention will turn and abidance will ensue.<br />Mounahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02416580298727681711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-35036096888463663352016-04-21T19:24:13.316+01:002016-04-21T19:24:13.316+01:00Dear Michael,
Thank you for all your work. I have ...Dear Michael,<br />Thank you for all your work. I have a question on the understanding of some of Ramana Maharshi’s teachings.<br />Some teachers in line with Ramana Maharshi (as Francis Lucille, student of Jean Klein) explain that the investigation should be to see if I have any proof that awareness (defined as that which is hearing these words right now) is limited and personal. To investigate this at the level of the mind and of the body and realise that I have no proof that awareness is limited and personal. This brings us to be open to the possibility that awareness is in fact unlimited and universal. The ultimate proof of this is to live our life from the point of view of not knowing and to be open to the possibility that awareness is unlimited and universal and to realise experiments. To live life as if awareness was unlimited and universal and to see how life responds to this. Increased serendipity and happiness in all areas of life are to be the “proof in the pudding” which confirms that everything is consciousness.<br />This teaching seems to differ from some conclusions in your blog based on Ramana Maharshi’s teachings. Ultimately, one is to be self attentive to the exclusion of anything else. If one manages this just one instant, this will lead to Manonasa and permanent experience of Self as in deep sleep. Once this happens, the world and the body do not rise anymore, only the Self is experienced. The body may still appear to be doing things but this appears so due to the wrong outlook of those looking at the Jnani.<br />My experience: I had an awakening experience some years ago. Now, I try just to be. I have the impression that things are made of the same “stuff” that one may call awareness. It is unclear if the ordinary awareness looking through my eyes is the same awareness with which this computer is made. I have the impression that this awareness is unlimited, I am open to the possibility that all bodies may share the same awareness. When I try to be aware of being I try to just be. My eyes don’t focus on anything special, they just gaze at air. The more I just rest in being the more things become subtle. My focus of attention is often distracted towards other things, so I just bring back my attention to being. I do not see how I could do this during work even though I have read that it is possible to do this during moments where I have nothing to do. I don’t see how it is possible to be attentive to awareness to the exclusion of anything else as eyes will always try to rest on something be it air. It is also unclear how everything is thoughts: the world, this computer etc… My theoretical understanding is that they are mentations made up of mind which is made up of awareness. It seems that my only hope is to try to be self attentive to the maximum and hope that one day everything will disappear and only the formless, featureless Self (which is said to be already present) will remain. Meanwhile, pain and pleasure alternate in the world. The other day, I had a strange experience, I was everything and everything was me, it didn’t last. As Ramana says, anything impermanent is not worth striving for.<br />All in all, there is just being as the background of experience, one can calm the mind to experience this peace, this is common to most teachings. It is the part about manonasa which is hard for me to integrate in my life. Are there any living beings in this world who have experienced manonasa? What about Muruganar and Sri Sadhu Om? I’m not quite convinced about the fact that multiple lives may be necessary for this to happen. All I know is that I am and I know this absolutely, all else is open to doubt.<br />I have been reading your blog for a while now, I haven’t read all articles but I’ve read quite a few such as the one on manonasa. <br />VMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05192411034663589393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-67683539142451508172016-04-21T19:07:01.512+01:002016-04-21T19:07:01.512+01:00dr sundaram,
“how to do &quot;vigilant self-atten...dr sundaram,<br /><br />“how to do &quot;vigilant self-attentiveness&quot; in all our daily walks of life. Self attend to what?among other parallel responsibilities and focus needed thereof in day to day activities”<br /><br />It is by attending to the person who is doing those activities. Michael has written extensively about it in various articles. For example, if you are working in an office in a very demanding job, it will certainly require 100% attention and focus. But the job itself will involve several tasks in a day. There will be some brief intervals between those tasks. It is in those intervals; you turn the focus on yourself and try to hold on to that focus to the best of your abilities. It may be just for a few seconds or for a minute or so. Then go back to the next task.<br />If attending to you is found to be difficult, then alternatively, one can attend or focus on the breath or OM or any other thing that one finds easy to attend to (this is not encouraged in this blog, but be rest assured that Bhagavan fully supported and encouraged it for people who have a natural affinity to it).<br /><br />“and also another query is if this is not an action what is this. is not practice also an doing an action? this is what i had requested”<br /><br />Again there are several articles written by Michael explaining why this is not an action. More importantly, it is worthwhile examining what if it is an action? Aren’t we doing an action when we eat, discuss in this blog, exercise and so on and so forth? Can we really exist without doing any action? So let’s say that all sadhana (including self-attentiveness) is an action that produces agamiya. Why is this problem? Isn’t Bhagavan on record saying that the self-attentiveness aka agamiya that he did in previous lives was the reason why in this life, his vichara was over in a matter of seconds. So you can be rest assured that the self-attentiveness or any other sadhana that you do will bear fruit in due course. There is nothing to gain in analyzing whether it is an action or not.<br />Sivanarulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-89595347728569613382016-04-21T16:23:50.009+01:002016-04-21T16:23:50.009+01:00ankle-deep pramada, yes, superficially &#39;will&#...ankle-deep pramada, yes, superficially &#39;will&#39; or &#39;will power&#39; is a function of our ego, but from where does this power originate? Our ego is a fictitious, non-existent and illusory entity, therefore nothing really belongs to it. The reality of our ego is only pure self-awareness, therefore the &#39;will power&#39; or all other powers must only reside in our true self. This is why our true self is called <i>chit-shakti</i> or awareness-power. Therefore this power in inherent in ourself as we really are.<br /><br />We can use our power to remain as we really are, or we can use this power to bring about an imaginary change by distorting the oneness of our true nature, by projecting multiplicity. This imaginary change which we bring about makes us forget our true non-dual nature, thereby making us bound to <i>maya</i>,which is another name for our mind. This is what I think Sri Sadhu Om is trying to teach us. Regards. <br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Sanjay Lohiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02384912997886218824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-1329107820942206602016-04-21T14:14:16.188+01:002016-04-21T14:14:16.188+01:00Sanjay,
is not the will included the will-power a ...Sanjay,<br />is not the will included the will-power a function of the ego ?<br />So why should we and our will-power be one and the same ?ankle-deep pramadanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-79892615021609721472016-04-21T14:04:37.306+01:002016-04-21T14:04:37.306+01:00Please refer to my point number 3. in my recent co...Please refer to my point number 3. in my recent comment typed in two parts (Date 21 April 10:11 and 10:45). I wrote there:<br /><br />Third type of freedom we have is our original freedom to will and act, and this is inherent in our <i>chit-skati</i>. [...]<br /><br />Out of the four types of freedom I mentioned in these comments, I am most unsure about what I wrote here, but I believe I was just trying to look at our original freedom to will and act logically because if we do not have this freedom, how can we originate our actions before it enters the cesspool of more actions, more <i>vasanas</i>, <i>prarabdha</i>, further actions and so on? Also I was alluding here to what Sri Sadhu Om has written in his book <i>The Path of Sri Ramana - Part Two</i>, under the chapter <i>Karma</i> - page 144. He writes here:<br /><br />As we have such Will-Power it is correct to say that we have perfect freedom. This Will-Power is our own Power and It is We. We and our Power are one the same.<br /><br />He who has such freedom can by His all-powerful Power either remain in His unchanging state of Self or He can bring about an <b>imaginary change</b>, limiting the oneness of His unlimited nature as if He had forgotten the Self. <br /><br />I am not sure whether what I wrote in my point number three in my previous set of comments and what Sri Sadhu Om is trying to explain here is same, but this much is sure that the type of freedom which Sri Sadhu Om is trying to explain here can be successfully acted upon, whereas as per Bhagavan we are not free to change anything that we are destined to experience. Therefore it would be nice if Michael comments on this topic and clarifies, what exactly is Sri Sadhu Om trying to explain to us here and how can we reconcile this explanation with Bhagavan&#39;s teaching on destiny - that is, we not free to change our predestined experiences by any means. Regards. <br />Sanjay Lohiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02384912997886218824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-33776820725095945452016-04-21T11:33:11.188+01:002016-04-21T11:33:11.188+01:00Dr.Sundaram,
the main thing of practising self-att...Dr.Sundaram,<br />the main thing of practising self-attentiveness is to be vigilant self-attentive which means to try looking carefully and permanently at the=your ego in all your activities and &#39;daily walks of life&#39;.<br />Do not care about if that is called an action or not. That is of minor or secondary importance.waving cornfieldnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-7655778215017476202016-04-21T11:01:34.677+01:002016-04-21T11:01:34.677+01:00Michael your last two comments above were very hel...Michael your last two comments above were very helpful, thank you.<br />Thank you too Sanjay for your reflections on them.<br /><br />I use to think everything was pre ordained and I had no choice as any decision I made were I had a so called choice was not actually the case as the choice I decided to make was pre ordained. However Bhagavan&#39;s note to his Mother and Michael&#39;s recent comment make me realise I do have a choice but what is meant to happen and not happen in my life will happen and not hapen regardless of what I do. But I do have the &quot;choice&quot; to try to attain or avoid positive or negative experiences.<br /><br />The best use of my free will is to practise attending to myslef which is what I am going to do now.<br /><br />Thank you Michael.<br />In appreciation <br />Bob Bob - Pnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-19887699786112140692016-04-21T10:57:00.004+01:002016-04-21T10:57:00.004+01:00sir, how to do &quot;vigilant self-attentiveness&q...sir, how to do &quot;vigilant self-attentiveness&quot; in all our daily walks of life. Self attend to what?among other parallel responsibilities and focus needed thereof in day to day activities and also another query is if this is not an action what is this. is not practice also an doing an action? this is what i had requested mr MICHEL JAMES to help me clarify and understand but i am yet to receive updates from you on this..any way i still look for guidance on this stated above from any other learned.............. thanks dr.sundaramhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16381590443637050853noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7345918888953765241.post-52534596220892752472016-04-21T10:44:47.653+01:002016-04-21T10:44:47.653+01:00(Continued from my last comment)
3. Third type of...(Continued from my last comment)<br /><br />3. Third type of freedom we have is our original freedom to will and act, and this is inherent in our <i>chit-skati</i>. Our pure self-awareness has no <i>vasanas</i> or <i>prarabdha</i>, but our original round of actions has supposedly started without these <i>vasanas</i> or <i>prarabdha</i> prompting us to act. Therefore our all powerful <i>chit-shakti</i> has this seeming power to will and action, and it is these actions which lead us to more and more actions. However in this process our original freedom of our <i>chit-shakti</i> is not lost. The actions originating from this freedom also creates <i>agamya</i>.<br /><br />4. Fourth and the last is our freedom to will and act by trying to remain in vigilant self-attentiveness. Though this self-attentiveness is not an action, but this practice requires will and effort. Only this type of freedom, if used properly and with love, is beneficial, and will not create any harmful <i>vasanas</i> or <i>karmas</i>. <br /><br />Any correction or expansion of my ideas by anyone will be appreciated. Our whole aim here should be to refine our understanding Regards.Sanjay Lohiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02384912997886218824noreply@blogger.com